Congress in both the House and the Senate are moving to
protect the Internet from the hands of the Federal government; viz., the
Federal Communication Commission (FCC) bureaucracy making law rather than
Congress. All bureaucratic rules touted as Federal law should be verified by
Congress before it has the force of law.
The legislation would not only take a politicized FCC out of
the Internet, but would keep some of good parts of the Net Neutrality issues
such as preventing ISP blocking or slowing data streaming of companies or
ideologies out of favor of the an ISP owner.
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)
has introduced HR4682,
the Open Internet Preservation Act, in the House of Representatives, along
with 21
co-sponsors.
The bill, which was referred
to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce near the end of December, seeks
to "amend the Communications Act of 1934 to ensure internet openness, to
prohibit blocking of lawful content, applications, services, and non-harmful
devices, to prohibit impairment or degradation of lawful internet traffic, to
limit the authority of the Federal Communications Commission and to preempt
State law with respect to internet openness obligations, to provide that broadband
internet access service shall be considered to be an information service, and
for other purposes."
This legislation begins to
address the growing threat by corporate giants, not just broadband services
that are seeking to eliminate anything by the state-controlled message to the
masses rather than allowing the internet to be a free flow of information.
“The Open Internet
Preservation Act will ensure the internet is a free and open space,” said Rep.
Blackburn, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Communications and
Technology Subcommittee.
“This legislation is simple,
it provides light-touch regulation so companies can invest and innovate, and
makes sure our internet is up to 21st century standards,” she added.
Blackburn's bill was
introduced on December 19, 2017 and came just one week after the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) repealed the 2015 Title II regulations under
the Communications Act of 1934, the so-called net neutrality rules.
The repealed regulations
classified broadband internet as a utility-like tool for communication. It will
now be categorized as an information service, which is what it is.
However, the repeal removes
bans on throttling, blocking and paid prioritization, as well as on how much
data companies would have to report.
So, Rep. Blackburn’s bill
would seek to restore some of those newly adopted regulations, but not all of
them.
Among the things HR 4682
would restore are two provisions of the net neutrality. It bans both
blocking and throttling while not including a ban on paid prioritization.
Blackburn sought to block the
implementation of Net Neutrality in several congresses she served in.
In the 112th, 113th and 114th
Congress, BlackburnintroducedtheInternet
Freedom Act, legislation that would block the FCC’s Net
Neutrality rules by stating that they shall have no force or effect and
prohibits the FCC from reissuing new Net Neutrality rules.
In 2016, the Senate
introduced a companion to Blackburn’s bill, S. 2602. The bill was introduced by
Senator Mike Lee (R-UT). Co-sponsors included Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL), Ted
Cruz (R-TX), Rand Paul (R-KY), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Thom Tillis (R-NC), John
Cornyn (R-TX), and Benjamin Sasse (R-NE).
“We must stop the FCC’s Net
Neutrality rules, which are nothing more than a Trojan horse for government
takeover of the Internet," rep. Blackburn said. "These
overreaching rules will stifle innovation, restrict freedoms, and lead to
billions of dollars in new fees and taxes for American consumers. We thank
Senator Lee for introducing the Senate version and look forward to working with
him as we move this forward."
“The economic burden of these
regulations will fall squarely on the backs of the consumers the FCC purports
to help," Senator Lee said. "The threat of anticompetitive
behavior should always be taken seriously. But it makes no sense for a
five-person panel of presidential appointees to write a sweeping law aimed at
solving a problem that might someday exist. There are more effective, more
democratic, and less intrusive ways to address anticompetitive behavior,
including existing antitrust and consumer-protection laws."
Blackburn commended Ajit Pai
for his getting net neutrality rules repealed and said that he "had done
his job."
Rep. Stivers, who
co-sponsored the bill, said of the legislation, “Bottom line: Free and open
internet should never be a partisan issue. This bill would put into law
crucial consumer protections that millions of Americans have asked for and that
are emphasized in the principles of net neutrality.”
He added that the bill did
just that “without imposing the burdensome and overly broad aspects that were
originally designed for the rotary telephone on the cultural and economic
engine that is our modern internet.”
The fight for a free and fair
internet is possibly the biggest fight of the century. If you wish to
voice support for this legislation, please contact your representativeor senatortoday!
Essentially President Barack Hussein Obama and the Leftist Dems have nationalized the Internet with the propaganda campaign of making the Net freer. It turns out the reality is the Internet is under tighter manipulative control by the government – meaning bureaucrats with a political axe to grind. You can thank the President for making sure three out of five FCC board members were his Dem acolytes. The vote incidentally was three Dems to two Republican board members.
Protect Internet Freedom sent an email with a link to a video using parody to show how government oversight of the Internet will operate. Below is the text of the email and I will include the video about where it is located on the original email.
We all know the FCC’s Internet takeover means one thing: bigger government.
Controlling every aspect of Internet access will not be a small task and it is not hard to imagine that Washington’s bureaucrats will revel in this growing authority. We created a short video imagining the very real possibility of a “Department of the Internet” scenario.
In case you live under an Internet rock the Dem majority on the FCC voted in favor 3-2 for a policy dubbed Net Neutrality on February 26, 2015. As much as the term “Net Neutrality” sounds like a good thing for We the American People, it is actually Obama-Government-Speak to regulate the Internet apart from the real neutrality involved with a Market Economy.
The commission, following a contentious meeting, voted 3-2 to adopt its so-called net neutrality plan -- a proposal that remained secret in the run-up to the final vote.
On its surface, the plan is aimed at barring service providers from creating paid "fast lanes" on the Internet, which consumer advocates and Internet companies worry would edge out cash-strapped startups and smaller Internet-based businesses. Chairman Tom Wheeler said it would ensure an "open, unfettered network."
But the rules, more broadly, would put the Internet in the same regulatory camp as the telephone by classifying it like a public utility, meaning providers like Comcast or Verizon would have to act in the "public interest" when providing a mobile connection to your home or phone. (FCC approves sweeping Internet regulation plan, Obama accused of meddling; By FoxNews.com with contribution by AP; Fox News – Politics; 2/26/15)
For all the promises from the Dems and Left Wing Dem proponents of Net Neutrality rules made by a bureaucracy rather than Congress of freer and fairer usage by consumers, the reality is now the government can control what is read or seen by rules and regulations. Does that sound lie Net Neutrality and Internet Freedom?
Newsmax shares the wisdom of Founding Father President George Washington on government regulation:
"It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it."
Here’s a tidbit of info that should reveal to you exactly the untrustworthiness of Obama, the Dems and any Left Wing agenda in general. Leftist New World Order dreamer George Soros has used nearly $200 MILLION bucks in contributions to Net Neutrality government-speak Leftist groups lobbying the FCC to basically usurp the Internet from a Free Market operated Internet.
Unless Congress gets involved, the FCC just made laws without Congressional enactment or oversight in the form of regulation rules. This is what an Obama/Dem controlled government now is capable of even though FCC Net Neutrality promoters deny such government tentacles will come into effect:
* Regulations give power to lobbyists and give rise to ‘regulatory capture’ as each corporation will ‘game’ the hundreds of pages of regulations to their pecuniary benefit
* Regulations will chill competition and make it harder, not easier for new entrants, who will face daunting regulatory compliance costs
* Regulations open a Pandora’s Box. The FCC can regulate pricing, access, limit the ability of new innovative services to try different business models
* FCC could impose a ‘fairness doctrine’ on the internet (as they once did on radio) and regulate content.
* FCC could impose price regimes and pricing controls as well as controls on terms of service, as title II allows, adding to overall costs on business
The Center for Individual Freedom (CFIF) has a fund raising email that is actually quite informative. I like to make sure you are aware of the fund raising intent of these cross posts to save you a bit of time if you really don’t to donate or would like to but your budget prevents such a donation. So just be aware that the links that say something “Fax Blast” should be utilized if you decide that you are capable of a donation. The CFIF email is about the involvement of George Soros’ money in this fake Net Neutrality rule making by the FCC.
Ergo be cognizant that a man - George Soros - who hates the American Liberties derived from the Bill of Rights (1st ten Amendments of the U.S. Constitution) is spending a portion of his billions of dollars on promoting the Leftist agenda behind the FCC regulation rules.
Net Neutrality is "a solution that won't work to a problem that doesn't exist," says Ajit Pai, a commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Pai is an outspoken (sic) opponent of expanding government control of the internet, including FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler's plan to regulate Internet Service Providers (ISPs) under the same Title II rules that are used to govern telephone-service providers as public utilities. Under current FCC regulations, ISPs are considered providers of "information services" and subject to essentially no federal regulation.
He is also sharply critical of President Barack Obama's very public push to influence policy at the FCC, which is technically an independent agency. Last year, it was widely believed that Wheeler, a former head of the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, would not push for Title II. Pai calls the president's actions—which included "creating a YouTube video of with very specific prescriptions as to what this agency should do"—unprecedented in his experience. Coupled with the fact that "the agency suddenly chang[ed] course from where it was to mimic the president’s plan," says Pai, "suggests that the independence of the agency has been compromised to some extent."
The FCC is scheduled to vote Thursday, February 26 on Wheeler's plan.
Pai explains his opposition to Title II reclassifcation (sic) to Reason's Nick Gillespie. Citing independent studies of American competitiveness and booming investment in telecommunications infrastructure compared to Europe, Pai argues that consumers are thriving and the market is doing its job.
Regulating the internet like a utility company, says Pai, will threaten the kind of innovation we've taken for granted over the past 20 years. "Do you trust the federal government to make the Internet ecosystem more vibrant than it is today?" Pai asks. "Can you think of any regulated utility like the electric company or water company that is as innovative as the Internet?"
Runs about 30 minutes.
Produced by Todd Krainin. Cameras by Meredith Bragg and Krainin.
"New Internet Regulations Finally Released By The Federal Communications Commission Make 46 References To A Group Funded By Billionaire George Soros And Co-Founded By A Neo-Marxist." -The Daily Caller
But please... keep reading... because what you're about to see may be the most shocking thing that you've read in years. Almost two weeks after voting on secret regulations to facilitate Barack Hussein Obama's takeover of the Internet, Barack Obama's FCC finally released 400 pages of these so-called Net Neutrality regulations to the public and it's far worse than we could have ever imagined.
Based on references in the regulations alone, it is clear that Barack Obama's takeover of the Internet was actually written -- in large part -- by radical Marxist-leaning organizations; and it has also come to light that radical socialist-leaning organizations funded by Billionaire Socialist George Soros and others have spent approximately 200 MILLION DOLLARS ($200,000,000.00) to make Barack Obama's tyrannical and dictatorial takeover of the Internet a reality.
Use the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every Member of the Republican Leadership of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. Or alternatively, send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every Republican Member of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives. Send My Blast Faxes
Millions of dollars of funding from Socialist Billionaire George Soros? ... Neo-Marxists calling the shots? ... While it may sound like a conspiracy theory, it is all, unfortunately, true... As a matter of fact, it's actually much worse than you may think.
The organization whose net neutrality arguments are cited at least 46 times in the Obama-FCC dictatorial regulations is ironically named Free Press. Free Press is funded by George Soros' Open Society Foundation and other left-wing groups like the Ford Foundation; and it was founded by Robert McChesney, an avowed Socialist who is presently a communications professor at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
And to McChesney so-called Net Neutrality is simply a means to an end. Specifically, it's the first step to be taken to fundamentally transform the United States into a socialist tyranny.
Don't take our word for it. Read what McChesney says about it for yourself:
According to DiscovertheNetworks.org, McChesney "told the website SocialistProject that 'unless you make significant changes in the media, it will be vastly more difficult to have a revolution.'"
Back in 2009, McChesney wrote that "any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself... to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles... We need to do whatever we can to limit capitalist propaganda, regulate it, minimize it, and perhaps even eliminate it."
DiscovertheNetworks.org again: "In a November 2000 Monthly Review article titled 'Journalism, Democracy, and Class Struggle,' he [McChesney] wrote: 'Our job is to make media reform part of our broader struggle for democracy, social justice, and, dare we say it, socialism.'"
Phil Kerpen, president of the free-market group American Commitment says that Chesney's goal is "to empower the federal government to ration and apportion Internet bandwidth as it sees fit, and to thereby control the Internet's content."
And McChesney said, back in 2009, when the concept of Net Neutrality was focused on more traditional means of communication: "At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies. We are not at that point yet. But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control."
Use the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every Member of the Republican Leadership of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. Or alternatively, send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every Republican Member of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives. Send My Blast Faxes
What Would You Say If The Government Had The Authority To Order Your Local AM Radio Station To Stop Broadcasting The Rush Limbaugh Show?
If everything we have said thus far sounds far-fetched, consider just one example of what is in these 400 pages of Obama-FCC regulations.
Here's what the FCC says about First Amendment rights in Section 544:
"The rules we adopt today do not curtail broadband providers' free speech rights. When engaged in broadband Internet access services, broadband providers are not speakers, but rather serve as conduits for the speech of others."
Here's a question: Do local AM radio stations not "serve as conduits for the speech of others." Come to think of it, is your radio not a "conduit" for the speech of others?
Now, let's be clear. These 400 pages of Obama-FCC regulations only apply to the Internet (at least for now), but the analogy should serve to illustrate EXACTLY what Barack Obama, George Soros and the FCC are thinking when it comes to your First Amendment rights.
If you're not a "speaker," the First Amendments doesn't apply to you. And who determines whether or not you're a "speaker" Why... none other than Barack Hussein Obama.
The thinking is straight out of George Orwell's Animal Farm. Barack Obama doesn't need to control your speech if he can control the "conduits" of your speech.
And that's exactly what he intends to do. If you like your Internet, you can keep your Internet and if you like your First Amendment rights, you can keep your First Amendment rights... You can say whatever you want but lots of luck when it comes to anyone actually hearing what you have to say or you hearing what others have to say to you because Barack Obama will control the "conduits" of speech.
Rush Limbaugh perhaps said it best:
"[D]o you want the people who gave you ObamaCare running your Internet service? Do you want them in charge of what you can get and when you can get it and how much it's gonna cost you?"
Use the hyperlink below to send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every Member of the Republican Leadership of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives. Or alternatively, send your urgent Blast Faxes to each and every Republican Member of the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives. Send My Blast Faxes
Yours In Freedom
Jeffrey L. Mazzella
Center for Individual Freedom 815 King Street Suite 303 Alexandria, VA 22314 Phone: 703-535-5836 Fax: 703-535-5838 _____________________________
Founded in 1998, the Center for Individual Freedom is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with the mission to protect and defend individual freedoms and individual rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
The Center seeks to focus public, legislative and judicial attention on the rule of law as embodied in the federal and state constitutions. Those fundamental documents both express and safeguard society’s commitment to individual freedom, not only through specific protections such as the Bill of Rights, but also through structural protections that constrain and disperse governmental authority.
In addition, the Center seeks to foster intellectual discourse by bringing together independent thinkers to examine broad-ranging issues of individual freedom in our global society. While the Center is decidedly for individual freedom, scholars and legal authorities who share that same basic philosophy differ as to the application of those principles in the complex world in which we live. The Center strives for balanced debate that encourages conflict resolution where there is tension between the rights of individuals and the requirements of government, as well as between individuals.
The Center engages in three distinct but complementary activities: …READ THE REST
Here is an essay that demonstrates the political side of the Obama/Democratic Party inspired FCC rules changing the Internet from a truly Free Speech zone into a government controlled entity that will be regulated according to which Political Party dominates the FCC federal bureaucracy. Jonathan Emord shows us how the FCC can regulate its displeasure with how an Internet Provider deals with its customers. The government’s pitch of net neutrality is double-speak for Big Brother Internet despotism.
At the behest of President Barack Obama, the Federal Communications Commission voted this past Thursday, 3-2, on party lines, to impose FCC control over access to and charges by internet service providers. This is the beginning of the end of freedom over the internet. So-called net neutrality is not neutral at all, but is a regulatory schema that imposes federal oversight and control over what was but a moment ago the last remaining example of largely unfettered freedom and free enterprise left in the world.
Longing for the power to force internet service providers to bend to the will of government masters, the Obama Administration aimed to get the proverbial camel’s nose into the tent, anticipating that its whole body would come next. Using the pretext of ensuring consumers had more rapid internet connections, the new regulations promise to do much more, essentially rendering all internet service providers common carriers subject to the same kind of innovation and competition stultifying regulations that made the old Bell system such an archaic, byzantine bureaucratic mess.
On the road to a better internet, now architects of systems and markets will have to stop at a government toll booth. There they must satisfy the subjective dictates of FCC commissioners or else they will not be allowed to proceed. One of the greatest, most powerful and far reaching technological achievements of the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries is now to be but another utility where rates, service plans, and technological advances will not be allowed unless first approved by the politicians who populate the Federal Communications Commission.
The FCC has just denied liberty and free enterprise its essential place in that medium which holds out more promise for the advancement of mankind than any other. The FCC has learned through broadcast, cable, and telephone regulation that structural controls beget in time near total control over a medium. By lording it over on the internet service providers in the years to come, the FCC will coerce and cajole them into implementing the political dictates of FCC Commissioners in a manner akin to FCC’s long and sordid history of control over the broadcast media.
Displeasing a regulator who has subjective power over the structure of media invites retaliation. What former FCC Chairman Newton Norman Minow referred to as “regulation by raised eyebrow” in broadcast regulation is now applicable in the internet context. The mere hint of an FCC Commissioner’s dissatisfaction with the operations of an Internet Service Provider will cause that provider to appreciate all too well that the regulator’s displeasure makes essential approvals far more difficult to obtain. Instead, most will alter their business plans to avoid regulatory payback, even if that means constricting access to some in favor of others, thereby affecting who may speak and what may be said.
In that single instance, the First Amendment’s command that government be disarmed of power over speech and press is eviscerated. The ultimate control over the structure and content of the medium has passed from private to public hands. Now the politically appointed, unelected heads of the FCC, will call the shots over the internet. In this one vote of the FCC, everyone in America, indeed in the world, has lost freedom and opportunity. February 26, 2015, is the blackest day so far in the history of the internet.
Jonathan W. Emord is an attorney who practices constitutional and administrative law before the federal courts and agencies. Ron Paul calls Jonathan “a hero of the health freedom revolution” and says “all freedom-loving Americans are in [his] debt . . . for his courtroom [victories] on behalf of health freedom.” He has defeated the FDA in federal court a remarkable eight times, seven on First Amendment grounds, and is the author of the Amazon bestsellers The Rise of Tyranny, Global Censorship of Health Information, and Restore the Republic. He is the American Justice columnist for U.S.A. Today Magazine and joins Robert Scott Bell weekly for “Jonathan Emord’s Sacred Fire of Liberty,” an hour long radio program on government threats to individual liberty. For more info visit Emord.com, join the Emord FDA/FTC Law Group on Linkedin, and follow Jonathan on twitter (@jonathanwemord).
NewsWithViews.com is dedicated to revealing lies, innuendo and agendas - wherever they may be. Our political affiliations are not to the left or the right, but to "what is right and true."
Our goal is to bring you the best news and commentaries on current events that may be manipulated or controlled by the mainstream media.
Our aim is to enlighten, educate and awaken people to the real issues facing this country and the world today.
NewsWithViews.com started publishing June of 2001. We noticed that there were websites that were the mouthpieces for the Republican party, the Democratic party, the feminist movement, the environmental movement, the Christian Right, etc., Everyone was in someone's corner. The Left points a finger at the right, the right points a finger at the left. Neither side sees their own evil and hypocrisy, they escape the truth about themselves by blaming and pointing a finger at the other.
It's not a Jewish, Christian, or a Muslim issue, neither is it a conservative or a liberal issue, nor a Republican or a Democrat issue, it's a Right or Wrong issue. Truth is UNIVERSAL. Everyone can recognize it but, some reject it. Truth and honesty unite, lies and deception divide. Bare in mind that Truth is hate to those that hate the Truth.
NewsWithViews.com is NOT affiliated with any religious organizations or groups. We believe in God and our Lord Jesus Christ the Savior of mankind.
The views and opinions held by our writers and contributors are their own, and not necessarily the views of our advertisers, NewsWithViews.com or its staff.
President Obama came out a few weeks ago urging the FCC to vote to regulate the Internet the same way that it regulates public utilities under Title II. What this means is that, for the first time, billions of dollars in fees will be attached to Internet service just like they are to telephone service.
You see, under Title II if someone wants to own a telephone company, there are fees baked into the law--fees companies pass on to customers.
Now, under this new regulatory regime, Internet service providers will be subject to these fees as well, and then pass them on to you, the consumer.
This is essentially a massive tax increase on the middle class, being passed in the dead of night without the American public really being made aware of what is going on.
The Internet is built on speed and dynamism, it’s always changing, there are always new and better ideas that are exploding onto the scene, and part of the reason for that is that innovators are not having to go ask Washington, DC for permission every time they want to do something new. What this really comes down to is a fundamental question:
Who do you want in charge of the direction of the Internet: people at dot-com startups that brought us game changing companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon and Uber; or nameless, faceless, unelected bureaucrats in our nation’s capital?
There is another aspect of this that gets overlooked: the Internet is an incredibly important force for freedom, for liberty, and the rights of free speech that we hold dear. It is an existential threat to tyrants in countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Russia who seek to keep information from their people.
We must preserve the high ground for the United States to stand up to these countries and tell them to keep the Internet free and preserve free speech on the Internet throughout the world. We cannot do that if we are regulating the Internet in a similar manner ourselves.
I am not accusing anyone of sinister motives here, but I am deeply concerned about the idea of any government bureaucrat having the power to tell companies what they can and cannot do. In the long term, this could have a chilling effect on political speech, in ways that today we could not even begin to imagine.
We do not have much time left to stop this gigantic government takeover of the Internet. The FCC is voting on February 26th and the Left is mobilizing to support their effort to do so. We cannot let the conversation be totally one-sided. The FCC needs to hear from us today--not tomorrow or next week or next month. Today. Please join me and go sign the petition to keep the Internet free. We must stand for liberty and preserve the Internet free of government interference.
![clip_image001[1]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwQ99YxGgVEOBuuze1Bm55ue2PpbSqJZxDeT4wrWV6ajPlrUWBEFiIkkgbmknqqMBL_wRqaKZxyelIsyoaKcTr601ii54fH_6lU7D9zpB3MvxeUC8JVoatGI87zI-kvUJMOCRGAvNq8ek/s1600-h/clip_image001%25255B1%25255D%25255B2%25255D.gif "clip_image001[1]"){kind=small}
![clip_image001[2]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEivtLWskLf8T0tpMemQ_P7C9zzi6TbuduXOmueIV9b69I77KFh-A-Ok82oV423z4O6Xr00VOV3wN84WBIAGNJ3Vz2JPJ6FzNn8XIC8vGndcRdWACWjJ0cOwOxpYPT9qV2o-Ms2SM8D3WIw/s1600-h/clip_image001%25255B2%25255D%25255B2%25255D.gif "clip_image001[2]"){kind=small}
![clip_image001[3]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh637ARV5DN8q6AJh4I1dBXasL_VOCbHPSEp555mw-qS3oPJ1GPMosgga1B4BwSenSvBc2Qhk0IU-kch07btnaczAuHXXUtVROwXa0fFvVzACygxYQYN41cQMZXiHm-q-X4kcpglejO8Q0/s1600-h/clip_image001%25255B3%25255D%25255B2%25255D.gif "clip_image001[3]"){kind=small}
![clip_image001[4]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaNSkOuvZV0cHzRxrsTKH837p75oasGgWxfXWnIWGMhVn9LLwsOjPvDrFia6H2Vw9Tlkby_RRIu2vZSQwquzNQJBePPUGRieTkkNvOh5U_HSi05YDDtwZZMr8O1CYpgWqe3Mhzc7pPAn0/s1600-h/clip_image001%25255B4%25255D%25255B2%25255D.gif "clip_image001[4]"){kind=small}
